Surgical principles for optimal treatment of esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma

The correlation between the margin of resection and prognosis in esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma

Adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction (AEG) has become increasingly common in Western and Asian populations. Surgical resection is the mainstay of treatment for AEG; however, determining the distance from the upper edge of the tumor to the esophageal margin (PM) is essential for accurate prognosis. Despite the relevance of these studies, most have been retrospective and vary widely in their conclusions. The PM is now widely accepted to have an impact on patient outcomes but can be masked by TNM at later stages. Extended PM is associated with improved outcomes, but the optimal PM is uncertain. Academics continue to debate the surgical route, extent of lymphadenectomy, preoperative tumor size assessment, intraoperative cryosection, neoadjuvant therapy, and other aspects to further ensure a negative margin in patients with gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. This review summarizes and evaluates the findings from these studies and suggests that the choice of approach for patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction should take into account the extent of esophagectomy and lymphadenectomy. Although several guidelines and reviews recommend the routine use of intraoperative cryosections to evaluate surgical margins, its generalizability is limited. Furthermore, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy are more likely to increase the R0 resection rate. In particular, intraoperative cryosections and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy were found to be more effective for achieving negative resection margins in signet ring cell carcinoma.

Utility of robotic surgery for Siewert type II/III adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction: transhiatal robotic versus laparoscopic approach

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery (RS) has been rapidly adopted for gastric cancer and adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG). However, the utility of RS for Siewert type II/III AEG remains unclear.

METHODS

Forty-one patients who underwent either transhiatal RS (n = 15) or laparoscopic surgery (LS) (n = 26) for Siewert type II/III AEG were enrolled in this study. The surgical outcomes of the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

In the entire cohort, there were no significant intergroup differences in the operative time, blood loss volume, or number of retrieved lymph nodes. The length of the postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the RS group than in the LS group (14.20 ± 7.10 days vs. 18.73 ± 17.82 days, respectively; p = 0.0388). The morbidity rate (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ 2) was similar between the groups. In the Siewert II cohort, there were no significant intergroup differences in short-term outcomes. In the entire cohort, there was no significant difference between the RS and LS groups in the 3-year overall survival rate (91.67% vs. 91.48%, N.S.) or 3-year disease-free survival rate (91.67% vs. 91.78%, N.S.), respectively. Likewise, in the Siewert type II cohort, there was no significant difference between the RS and LS groups in the 3-year overall survival rate (80.00% vs. 93.33%, N.S.) or 3-year disease-free survival rate (80.00% vs. 94.12%, N.S.), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Transhiatal RS for Siewert II/III AEG was safe and contributed to similar short-term and long-term outcomes compared with LS.

Facing adenocarcinoma of distal esophagus and esophagogastric junction: a CROSS versus FLOT propensity score-matched analysis of oncological outcomes in a high-volume institution

Multimodality treatments are the gold standard for advanced resectable gastroesophageal cancer. Neoadjuvant CROSS and perioperative FLOT regimens are adopted for distal esophageal and esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma (DE/EGJ AC). At present, none of the approaches is clearly superior in the context of a curative-intent multimodal treatment. We analyzed consecutive patients treated with CROSS or FLOT and surgery for DE/EGJ AC between August 2017 and October 2021. Propensity score matching was performed to balance baseline characteristics of patients. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival. Secondary endpoints included overall survival, 90-day morbidity/mortality rates, pathological complete response, margin-negative resection, and pattern of recurrence. Of the 111 patients included, 84 were correctly matched after PSM, 42 in each group. The 2-year DFS rate was 54.2% versus 64.1% in the CROSS and FLOT group, respectively (p = 0.182). Patients in the CROSS group showed a lower number of harvested LN when compared to the FLOT group (29.5 versus 39.0 respectively, p = 0.005). A higher rate of distal nodal recurrence was found in the CROSS group (23.8% versus 4.8%, p = 0.026). Although not significant, the CROSS group showed a trend toward higher rate of isolated distant recurrence (33.3% versus 21.4% respectively, p = 0.328), together with a higher rate of early recurrence (23.8% versus 9.5% respectively, p = 0.062). FLOT and CROSS regimens for DE/EGJ AC offer similar DFS and OS, together with comparable morbidity/mortality rates. CROSS regimen was associated with a higher distant nodal recurrence rate. Results of ongoing randomized clinical trials are awaited.

Surgical Treatment of Siewert II Gastroesophagel Junction Adenocarcinoma: Esophagectomy or Gastrectomy? Review

Introduction. Surgery is the only curative treatment option for patients with gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma. These tumors can be resected by gastrectomy or esophagectomy depending on tumor localization. Although, both surgeries are available for Siewert type II GEJ cancer, it remains unknown which one is superior. This review summarizes current evidences on the optimal surgical approach for Siewert type II GEJ adenocarcinoma. Methods. The literature search was performed within the PubMed database and 9 stu­dies comparing gastrectomy and esophagectomy for Siewert type II GEJ adenocarcinoma were included. The outcomes of interest included: length of surgery, numbers of retrieved lymph nodes, resection margins, postoperative morbidity and mortality, hospitalization time, 5-year overall, and disease-free survival rates. Results. Current studies do not favor any type of surgery in terms of length of the surgery, R0 resection rate, or postoperative morbidity. There is some tendency towards higher anastomotic leakage and postoperative surgical site infections rate after gastrectomy, while a higher incidence of pneumonia after esophagectomy. Similar, available studies suggest, that esophagectomy may lead to improved long-term outcomes. Conclusions. There is a lack of high-quality studies comparing gastrectomy and esophagectomy for Siewert type II GEJ adenocarcinoma. Esophagectomy may lead to improved long-term outcomes, but this preliminary data has to be confirmed in large, randomized control trials.

Transthoracic esophagectomy compared to transhiatal extended gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction: a multicenter retrospective cohort study

Optimal surgical treatment for Siewert type II esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma is debated. The aim of this study was to compare transhiatal extended gastrectomy (TEG) and transthoracic esophagectomy (TTE). Patients with Siewert type II tumors who underwent a resection by TEG or TTE in two centers (Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, and University of Verona) between 2014 and 2019 were identified. To limit selection bias, patients were matched for baseline characteristics and compared with a multivariable logistic regression model. Some 159 patients treated by TEG (60 patients, 37.7%) or TTE (99 patients, 62.3%) were included. Patients in the TEG group were older, had less tumor invasion of the esophagus, and were more often excluded from neoadjuvant therapy. Post-operative morbidity was comparable (P = 0.88), while 90-day mortality was higher after TEG (90-day mortality 10.0% in TEG group vs. 2.0% in TTE group P = 0.01). R0 resection was achieved in 83.3% of patients after TEG and in 97.9% after TTE (P < 0.01), with the proximal resection margin involved in 16.6% of patients after TEG versus 0 in TTE group (P < 0.01). The 3-year overall survival was comparable (TEG: 36.5%, TTE: 48.4%, P = 0.12). At multivariable analysis, (y)pT category was an independent risk factor for 3-year recurrence. After matching, TEG was still associated with an increased risk of incomplete tumor resection (P = 0.03) and proximal margin involvement (P < 0.01), while there were no differences in post-operative morbidity (P = 0.56) and mortality (P = 0.31). Our data suggest that patients with Siewert type II tumors treated by TEG are exposed to a higher risk of positive proximal resection margin compared to TTE.

Prognosis after neoadjuvant chemoradiation or chemotherapy for locally advanced gastro-oesophageal junctional adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Trials typically group cancers of the gastro-oesophageal junction (GOJ) with oesophageal or gastric cancer when studying neoadjuvant chemoradiation and perioperative chemotherapy, so the results may not be fully applicable to GOJ cancer. Because optimal neoadjuvant treatment for GOJ cancer remains controversial, outcomes with neoadjuvant chemoradiation versus chemotherapy for locally advanced GOJ adenocarcinoma were compared retrospectively.

METHODS

Data were collected from all patients who underwent neoadjuvant treatment followed by surgery for adenocarcinoma located at the GOJ at a single high-volume institution between 2002 and 2017. Postoperative major complications and mortality were compared between groups using Fisher's exact test. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were assessed by log rank test and multivariable Cox regression analyses. Cumulative incidence functions were used to estimate recurrence, and groups were compared using Gray's test.

RESULTS

Of 775 patients, 650 had neoadjuvant chemoradiation and 125 had chemotherapy. These groups were comparable in terms of clinical tumour and lymph node categories, although the chemoradiation group had greater proportions of white men, complete pathological response to chemotherapy, and smaller proportions of diffuse cancer, poor differentiation, and neurovascular invasion. Postoperative major complications (20.0 versus 17.6 per cent) and 30-day mortality (1.7 versus 1.6 per cent) were not significantly different between the chemoradiation and chemotherapy groups. After adjustment, type of therapy (chemoradiation versus chemotherapy) was not significantly associated with OS (hazard ratio (HR) 1.26, 95 per cent c.i. 0.96 to 1.67) or DFS (HR 1.27, 0.98 to 1.64). Type of recurrence (local, regional, or distant) did not differ after neoadjuvant chemoradiation versus chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

In patients undergoing surgical resection for locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the GOJ, OS and DFS did not differ significantly between patients who had neoadjuvant chemoradiation compared with chemotherapy.

Primary tumor resection benefited the survival of patients with distant metastatic gastric cancer

Background:

The role of surgery in the treatment of patients with distant metastatic (M1) gastric cancer (GC) remains controversial currently. This study aimed to clarify the impact of primary tumor resection (PTR) on the survival of such patients.

Materials and Methods:

The surveillance, epidemiology, and end results database was adopted to extract eligible patients. We designed a retrospective case–control study. The patients were divided into two groups according to whether they received PTR. The 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to balance the confounding factors between no-surgery and surgery groups. The categorical variables were described with Chi-square tests. Cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated by Kaplan–Meier method with log-rank test. Cox proportional hazard models were utilized to identify prognostic factors of CSS.

Results:

A total of 1716 patients were included, including 1108 (64.6%) patients without surgery and 608 (35.4%) patients with surgery. After PSM, most confounders were well balanced between the two comparison groups. Survival analysis in matched cohorts indicated that surgery exerted significant survival advantages in both CSS and OS curves. The median CSS was 11.0 (9.8–12.2) months in the surgery group versus 9.0 (8.0–10.0) months in the no-surgery group (P < 0.001). Multivariable Cox regression analysis identified surgery as an independent prognostic factor for favorable prognosis (hazard ratio: 0.689, 95% confidence interval: 0.538–0.881, P = 0.003).

Conclusion:

Surgery showed significant survival benefits for the patients with M1 stage GC. Our study has provided additional evidence to support PTR for these patients.

Adverse Biology in Adenocarcinoma of the Esophagus and Esophagogastric Junction Impacts Survival and Response to Neoadjuvant Therapy Independent of Anatomic Subtype

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to propose and test a novel adverse pathology classification in AEG.

BACKGROUND

Recent scientific advances show genomic and molecular concordance across all AEG types, suggesting a rationale for a biologic classification. We tested a 3-dimension adverse pathology classification across the entire junction and per Siewert anatomic subtype.

METHODS

Of 1625 patients with AEG, 650 underwent radical surgery, 55% post-neoadjuvant therapy (NeoT). Adverse features defined a priori were poor differentiation (PD), lymphatic invasion (LI), vascular invasion (VI), and perineural invasion (PN), with 3 groupings: 0 (no adverse feature), 1 to 2, and 3 to 4. Multivariable logistic and Cox proportional hazards regression were applied.

RESULTS

For adverse pathology, 31%, 46%, and 23% had 0, 1 to 2, and 3 to 4, respectively. Fifty percent of cases were AEG I, 25% AEG II, and 25% AEG III. Median survival was not reached, 49 and 17 months for 0, 1 to 2, and 3 to 4 adverse pathology, respectively (P < 0.001), and 76, 51, and 34 months for AEG I, II, and III, respectively (P < 0.001); AEG I was significantly (P< 0.001) associated with lower c (y)pT and c (y)pN stages, and LI, VI, PN, and PD (poor vs other). The pathology model was significant for survival along with (y)pT and (y)pN, and predicted response to chemotherapy and chemoradiation irrespective of anatomic subtype (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

A novel classification using standard pathology as proxy for poor biology is associated with survival and response to therapy. This effect is observed across the entire AEG spectrum, highlighting how biology should be aligned with anatomy in the modern paradigm of AEG management and design of clinical trials.

Patterns of recurrence in adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction: a retrospective study

Background

The prognosis of adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG) is poor. Understanding the postoperative recurrence pattern of AEG is helpful to verify the effectiveness of treatment and optimize subsequent treatment, so as to improve prognosis.

Methods

This single-center retrospective study included patients with stage III AEG who underwent surgical treatment between January 2009 and December 2016. According to the different postoperative treatment arm, patients were divided into surgery and surgery plus chemotherapy groups. Recurrence-free survival was used as the outcome to compare the recurrence site and pattern between the groups.

Results

In total, were 306 patients enrolled, 123 in the surgery group and 183 in the surgery plus chemotherapy group. During follow-up (median 17.1 months) of 24 months after surgery, 62.0% of patients had tumor recurrence. The overall recurrence rates in the surgery and surgery plus chemotherapy groups were 86.9% and 77.0%, respectively. The recurrence patterns of both groups were mainly distant metastasis. Postoperative chemotherapy reduced the incidence of hematogenous dissemination from 51.2 to 42.0%. Multivariate Cox analysis showed that the pN stage increased the risk of recurrence, while surgery plus chemotherapy reduced the risk.

Conclusions

Patients with AEG have a risk of hematogenous dissemination after surgery. Postoperative treatment arm and pN stage were independent risk factors in patients with AEG. Surgery plus chemotherapy can improve recurrence-free survival and reduce distant metastasis, but they do not have a beneficial role in controlling local recurrence.